The present invention comprises an apparatus and software method for taking two or more rate plans from the same or different providers and providing an output report which indicates a true, net cost, bottom line figure for both plans on a periodic basis (e.g. monthly) to allow an end user to compare the differing rate plans. The report can be a visual report such as on a computer device such as a display, a physical (hard copy) report such as a printed report, or any combination thereof.
Currently, competition for consumers of utilities such as telecommunications, both local and long distance, has generated numerous marketing plans. These plans usually vary in options, add-ons, and other characteristics, making a true comparison of one plan to another plan difficult and often inaccurate. Additionally, competition for consumers in other service areas such as the power utility marketplace is beginning to become a reality.
Given the plethora of competing rate plans and choices, consumers need a tool to allow them to objectively compare various rate plans offered by one service provider against those rate plans offered by competitors on a true, net—net basis, i.e. the net cost to the consumer of a rate plan compared to the net cost to the consumer of an alternative plan. In this sense, “net” includes the bottom line, total cost to the consumer for that service and its component categories.
Some prior art such as U.S. Pat. No. 5,659,601 issued to Cheslog is illustrative. Cheslog '601 processes call detail records obtained from a single provider's data, and specifically obtained from cellular telephony providers in Cheslog, to produce invoices and reports containing consolidated billing, usage, and cost information for current and potential other plans. Cheslog teaches a billing system method comprising the steps of selecting cellular telephone user's records, creating a summary record, accessing peak and non-peak usage minutes, calculating costs based on usage minutes, and selecting a rate plan from a plurality of rate plans that has a lowest calculated cost. Cheslog is limited to cellular telephony and, more specifically, to internal billing practices of a single cellular service provider, and does not provide for nor suggest allowing interactive access to such a comparison, such as may be had using a form driven interface. Moreover, Cheslog only analyzes the traffic pattern of the internal billing generated by that customer for that service provider. There is no suggestion nor teaching to provide comparisons of a cellular service provider to other plans from competing companies. Tariff and rate databases descriptive of other service providers are not considered, nor are they a factor. Further, there is no suggestion nor teaching by Cheslog to provide comparisons of a service provider other than cellular telephony to other plans from competing companies, especially important as differing service providers offer similar or divergent services in similar or divergent categorizations of these services, making it difficult to obtain a true net—net, bottom line comparison. Further still, Cheslog does not teach nor suggest allowing a user or an agent of the user to switch to differing service providers or provide an agent of user who effectuates such a switch to receive financial incentives for effecting the switch.
Accordingly, an improved apparatus and method for comparing a plurality of rate plans using historical data on a net—net basis, each rate plan having differing characteristics, is provided.